February 28, 2005

Pvt. Ryan Gets A Pass (updated 3/01) [5:12 pm]

Your tax dollars at work: In the Matter of Complaints Against Various Television Licensees Regarding Their Broadcast on November 11, 2004, of the ABC Television Network’s Presentation of the Film “Saving Private Ryan” (press release)

18. In so concluding, we find that this case is distinguishable from that in which we

previously found the use of the word “fucking” during the broadcast of the 2003 Golden Globe Awards ceremony to be indecent and profane in context. The contextual differences between the expletives contained in the broadcast of the film here and that contained in the 2003 broadcast of the Golden Globe Awards ceremony are critical to our analysis under section 1464. The utterance of the word “fucking” by a performer during the Golden Globe Awards telecast occurred in the context of a live awards program in which use of the word was shocking and gratuitous, where no claim of “any political, scientific or other independent value” was made, and during which children were expected to be in the audience. Consequently, we concluded that, in context, the use of the word “fucking” in that instance was indecent and profane. In contrast, and as discussed above, in the different context presented here, the complained-of material broadcast during the presentation of the film “Saving Private Ryan” is not indecent or profane.

Hmmmmmmmm - and how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, again? Too bad stations had to wait for someone to take the plunge before the FCC would rule.

Later: CNN looks at What was censored at the Oscars [pdf]

Comedian Robin Williams said it all when he walked on stage with a piece of white tape over his mouth.

Williams was to have performed a song lampooning conservative critic James C. Dobson, whose group had criticized cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants for appearing in a video it branded “pro-homosexual.”

He was going to do it by concentrating on the dark underside of other cartoon characters, asking, for example whether Casper the Friendly Ghost wore that white sheet as a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

Marc Shaiman, who wrote Williams’ original routine, said he decided to withdraw the material after ABC raised objections that would have led to him re-writing 11 of 36 lines. ABC declined to comment.

[...] Williams was not available to comment on his act at the Oscars, but he told the New York Times [pdf] on Friday:

“For a while you get mad, then you get over it. They’re afraid of saying Olive Oyl is anorexic. It tells you about the state of humor. It’s strange to think: How afraid are you?”

permalink to just this entry

The New Yorker on Ringtones [2:07 pm]

Ring My Bell: The expensive pleasures of the ringtone [pdf]

Ringtones of either variety cost about two dollars and are typically no more than twenty-five seconds long. Nevertheless, according to Consect, a marketing and consulting firm in Manhattan, ringtones generated four billion dollars in sales around the world in 2004. The United States accounted for only three hundred million of these dollars, although Consect predicts that the figure will double this year. Fabrice Grinda, the C.E.O. of Zingy, a company in New York that sells ringtones and cell-phone games, told me that in parts of Asia ringtones now outsell some types of CDs. “In 2004, the Korean ringtone market was three hundred and fifty million dollars, while the CD market for singles was just two hundred and fifty million,” Grinda said.

But America is catching up. [...]

[...] Polyphonic ringtones are essentially cover versions of songs: aggregators must pay royalties to the publisher, who then pays the songwriter. But master tones are compressed versions of original recordings, which means that record labels—the entities that typically own recordings—are entitled to collect a fee, too.

That fee can be considerable: record labels get twenty-five per cent of every master-tone sale (though they must pass along a portion of their take to the performer and the publisher). “It’s an unbelievable mess,” Les Watkins, the vice-president of Music Reports, Inc., a music-licensing and accounting firm, said. “A lot of these aggregator companies were very early players, essentially beholden to the major record labels and the music publishers to get the rights they needed. And, in this country, the music business is a very mature and consolidated business—somewhat collusive, in fact. The aggregators accepted rates and terms that they really didn’t have to accept, and agreed to license the music in such a way that they’re overpaying by a tremendous multiple.”

This arrangement is unlikely to last. There are now Web-based companies, like Xingtone, for example, that will convert songs from your collection into master tones. Or you can do it yourself: some new cell-phone models can be connected to a computer by a data cable, allowing you to create master tones from MP3 files at home. However it is done, transferring music that you own to your phone is legal under copyright law.

Slashdot: Short History of Cellphone Ringtones

permalink to just this entry

FCC’s Copps on Broadband Policy [9:20 am]

Why our broadband policy’s still a mess

At the same time, the state legislature in Indiana recently shot down a bill that would impose significant restrictions on municipalities for launching their own broadband infrastructure services.

It’s not an easy thing if you’re the leader of a hard-pressed, cash-strapped municipality–as all of them are in this day and age–to take on additional burden of providing broadband to your people.

I think we do a grave injustice in trying to hobble municipalities. That’s an entrepreneurial approach, that’s an innovative approach. Why don’t we encourage that instead of having bills introduced–”Oh, you can’t do this because it’s interfering with somebody’s idea of the functioning of the marketplace.” And then the marketplace is not functioning in those places.

The Bells say that government should not be competing with the private sector.
They are not out there trying to put broadband in the municipality. Where is the competition?

The Bells also say they’re trying to protect residents from being unfairly taxed if such an infrastructure were to go belly-up.

Well, a municipality is a democratically run institution. They can make their own decisions. They don’t need the Bells. They don’t need the Administration, and they don’t need me telling them what kind of decision they should be making.

[...] You’ve been very outspoken about network neutrality. You had some comments about that today, during your speech.

I’ve been outspoken about the principle of nondiscrimination. I think that’s the first step we have to take and for everybody to agree on that. I spoke about this a year or two ago. I was happy to see (FCC Chairman Michael) Powell give similar remarks and commitment to that principle of nondiscrimination–open access or network neutrality. I think Chairman Powell talks a lot about best practices and voluntary guidelines and things like that, and you’d like to hope that that would be sufficient.

But then you read something in the paper, like the complaint that Vonage may file with the commission, and you realize that maybe there is a problem out there and maybe we ought to ask ourselves a question: Is all this really going to take care of itself without some sort of more imaginative or innovative approach from the commission?

Related: Michal Geist’s article: Let towns, cities provide cheap, everywhere broadband [pdf]

Commissioner Copps’ speech - Remarks of Commissioner Copps; “9-1-1 Goes To Washington Critical Issues Forum”

Later: Slashdot discussion - FCC Member Copps In Favor of Municipal WiFi

permalink to just this entry

What Makes A Utility “Public?” [9:15 am]

Big Telcos Fighting Public-Sector Competition [pdf]

Cities and towns from San Francisco to Philadelphia, viewing access to advanced telecommunications as pivotal to prosperity, are aggressively seeking ways to provide high-speed Internet connections, wired or wireless, for citizens and local businesses.

But telephone and cable TV companies have responded by flexing political and financial muscle at the state level, arguing that government has no business getting into their business.

So far, about a dozen states have passed measures either restricting or banning public sector efforts to deliver telecom services, while similar legislation has been introduced in about a half dozen other states.

And in related battles, Bellsouth Corp. is suing a North Carolina town that is leasing space on its fiber-optic network, while SBC Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp. mailed fliers and ran newspaper ads in Illinois last year to help defeat a three-town referendum on building a fiber network.

permalink to just this entry

UK Digital Film Distribution [9:05 am]

UK pioneers digital film network

Most cinemas currently have mechanical projectors but the new network will see up to 250 screens in up to 150 cinemas fitted with digital projectors capable of displaying high definition images.

The new network will double the world’s total of digital screens.

[...] Each film is about 100 gigabytes and has been compressed from an original one terabyte-size file.

[...] The film will all be encrypted to prevent piracy and each cinema will have an individual key which will unlock the movie.

[...] Digital prints cost less than a traditional 35mm print - giving distributors more flexibility in how they screen films, said Ms Deans.

“It can cost up to £1,500 to make a copy of a print for specialist films. “In the digital world you can make prints for considerably less than that.

“Distributors can then send out prints to more cinemas and prints can stay in cinemas for much longer.”

permalink to just this entry

Network Control [8:47 am]

Tough rules for ringtone sellers

Firms that flout rules on how ringtones and other mobile extras are sold could be cut off from all UK phone networks.

The rules allow offenders to be cut off if they do not let consumers know exactly what they get for their money and how to turn off the services.

permalink to just this entry

Online Selling To Teens [8:33 am]

Online Retailers Pursue Teenagers — This article is about the efforts of Federated department stores to get kids to shop at their new online portal www.thisit.com. But I was struck by this statistic in the article:

Teenage boys buy more goods online, Mr. Callender said, because the items they are interested in - like videos, music and tech gizmos - are easier to evaluate online than the sweaters, shoes and other items that are high on teenage girls’ online shopping lists. “Also, shopping is more a social occasion for girls,” he said. “But we are seeing girls becoming more comfortable with buying clothes online.”

Analysts and online executives said that the increasing use of high-speed connections by residential Internet users has boosted the teenage market. Faster connections give Web sites license to offer more multimedia features, which can retain adolescents’ attention without frustrating other visitors.

EBay is the notable exception to the rule that teenagers crave gilt and flash from their Web sites. The site is by far the most popular online shopping destination for teenagers. According to comScore Media Metrix, an Internet consultancy, eBay had nearly 5 million visitors between the ages of 12 and 17 in January, compared with about 3 million for Amazon, which ranked second.

Here’s the question — how do they know? And how interesting that they get to sell that info to comScore Media Metrix and their ilk.

permalink to just this entry

WTF? Price Hikes? [8:19 am]

So, is this an indication that the industry expects to win Grokster, or is this an effort to make Grokster look like more of a threat by killing the nascent eTailing business? Or is this just foolish, shortsighted greed? Music download prices to rise

Several big labels are in talks with online music retailers to get them to increase prices,according to the FT. The labels are looking to increase the wholesale prices shops pay for tracks. Sites in the US typically sell tracks for 99 cents each. The wholesale price is currently 65 cents per track, according to the FT.

Universal and Sony BMG are less keen to put prices up. EMI and Time Warner refused to comment on the FT story. Some observers are concerned that increasing prices would push people back to peer-to-peer networks and dodgy copies of songs.

The music industry is apparently unhappy with Apple’s increasing share of the market - the firm sells about 65 per cent of songs sold online. The arrival of cheaper iPods is likely to give the firm an even larger share of the market. Apple refused to comment on the FT’s story but Steve Jobs is reportedly deeply unhappy with the attempted price hike.

One suggestion is that labels want to introduce variable pricing - so they can charge more for top selling tracks.

CNN’s Music download prices rising? [pdf]

Later: Slashdot’s MP3 Download Prices to Rise?; and, in true Slashdot fashion, a repeat: Music Labels May Seek Higher Download Prices

Later: A link to the FT article - Top music labels try to raise prices for downloads [pdf]

permalink to just this entry

Round 2: Negativland IPod [8:05 am]

Positive About Negativland IPod (see earlier Those Negativland Troublemakers!) - the auction site is definitely worth a visit!

Three months ago, artist Francis Hwang was blocked from selling an unauthorized Special-Edition Negativland vs. U2 IPod on eBay’s auction site after Apple complained it violated its copyrights.

So now Hwang has decided to ditch eBay. He’s selling the iPod on his own website with the intention of turning a statement about pop culture into a free speech issue — even if Apple launches a legal challenge.

[...] “I paid money to Apple and I used my own credit card to buy a U2 iPod, said Hwang, “This thing that I’m selling is mine to do so.”

Hwang may be playing with fire. Apple is famously litigious. The company has sued many times to protect its intellectual property rights and trademarks, and is currently suing several journalists for allegedly misappropriating trade secrets.

But Hwang said he is confident Apple will not take legal action. The company, he said, has no legal grounds whatsoever to object to the iPod’s sale.

Hwang said his Negativland vs. U2 iPod does not violate any of Apple’s intellectual property rights: It cannot be confused with an official Apple product, and because he bought the Negativland CDs and the original iPod, he’s at liberty to resell them.

“I’m not a martyr,” he said. “I’m not going to take a fall so people can feel good about themselves. I want to show that if you pick your battles carefully you can win.”

From the auction site:

Bidders should be aware that Apple Computer has alleged that this parody is in violation of its intellectual property rights. Francis Hwang disclaims any and all loss or liability resulting from, but not limited to: (1) glee experienced due to the thumbing of one’s nose at a large corporation’s abuse of intellectual property law; (2) ontological anxiety about whether to treat the Unauthorized iPod U2 vs. Negativland Special Edition as a collectible artifact of an online performance or a quickly obsolescing consumer appliance; (3) the desire to gloat to one’s friends and associates about the possession of this product.

permalink to just this entry

Alliances in the Grokster Battle [7:14 am]

Frankly, I don’t think one needs to go any further than “Fear Factor” and similar “reality” shows to find pornography these days, but that’s just me (OK, maybe not). After all, isn’t pornography just people degrading themselves for the gratification of a third party observer in exchange for money?

It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court elects to respond to this sort of politically charged hysteria: File - Sharing Case Unites Unlikely Allies [pdf]

File-swapping services make pornography easily accessible to minors, the social conservatives submit. The entertainment companies, meanwhile, blame sharing for declining sales and lost revenue.

An unlikely alliance thus formed.

“Hollywood is definitely a strange bedfellow to most of us,” said Jim Backlin, vice president of legislative affairs for the Christian Coalition of America. “Our goal was to cut down child pornography and other kinds of pornography, and if for some reason we were allied with the Hollywood types this time, so be it.”

On the other side, the file-sharing companies have also found unlikely allies, including libraries concerned that tighter copyright controls would stifle free speech.

[...] Attorneys general for 39 states and Guam, meanwhile, have sided with the social conservatives, raising concern over the potential for minors to stumble upon pornography.

The federal government also filed a brief. It argues that while file-sharing technology has legitimate uses, Morpheus and Grokster profit by encouraging computer users to copy music and films without paying for them.

Not to be outdone, file-sharing companies have support from a big slice of the technology sector.

“If Hollywood gets its way, they’ll be granted de facto control over, frankly, the vast majority of communications and technology today,” said Will Rodger, director of public policy for the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents Sun Microsystems Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and 28 other companies.

The Consumer Electronics Association, which represents upward of 1,700 technology companies, including Sony Corp., Intel Corp., TiVo Inc., is also planning a brief in support of Grokster and StreamCast.

The companies fear a ruling against the file-sharing services would leave them susceptible to lawsuits if they develop devices or technologies not approved by the entertainment industry.

[...] “We think there’s a distinction between analyzing the legality of a technology and analyzing the legality of a company or a company’s behavior,” said Jonathan Potter, executive director of the Digital Media Association, which counts Apple Computer Inc. and Microsoft Corp. among its members. “We don’t think companies who create technology should be liable for other uses of the technology.”

Wonder where the National Rifle Association stands on this?

Later: Ernest Miller’s posting on other discussions of this set of alliances - An Engine of Censorship

Is it a coincidence that the copyright industry (which usually celebrates the First Amendment) seeks to get in bed with censors?

permalink to just this entry

A Detailed Look At The Politics Of Spectrum [6:56 am]

Spectrum Wars By Drew Clark, National Journal’s Technology Daily [pdf]

The battle is now fully joined over what “television” means. Once upon a time, TV was what broadcasters put over the air on the scarce frequencies that the government gave them for free. They had to keep it clean and, every four years, send their news divisions to the national political conventions. Gradually, “TV” came to mean HBO and ESPN and Discovery and C-SPAN, as cable networks carved the American population up into marketing niches. The still-powerful broadcast networks say that digital television gives them a second chance. But to do what? They don’t know. That’s why the networks are the biggest players in the cable industry.

Meanwhile, all that beachfront property sits, vastly underutilized. Cable doesn’t care about the spectrum, even though the cable industry may cause broadcasters to give it up. But as Powell came to realize, there are plenty of other people clamoring to get on the beach. “Rural broadband would be much more feasible” if WiFi providers could use the spectrum that broadcasters are supposed to vacate instead of their current desert territory at 2.4 gigahertz, said Peter Pitsch, Intel’s director of communications policy. “Broadcasters’ spectrum would provide a plethora of services that are far more important to the future of the country than digital reruns of Friends,” said Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit Public Knowledge. A lifelong public-interest advocate who sided with broadcasters in their fight to get carried on cable, Sohn has abandoned a no-win effort to force “public-interest” obligations on broadcasters, she says. “Wouldn’t it be better if we just took all the spectrum away?”

permalink to just this entry

February 27, 2005

Sony BMG Takes The Plunge [12:52 pm]

Sony BMG Ramps Up CD Copy-Protection Plan [pdf]

Sony BMG expects that by year’s end a substantial number of its U.S. releases will employ either Sunncomm’s newly enhanced MediaMax or First4Internet’s XCP to address piracy concerns. No matter which technology a CD uses, it will include such extras as photo galleries, enhanced liner notes and links to other features.

“What matters the most to us is the consumer experience,” Sony BMG Sales Enterprise co-president Jordan Katz says. “Both technologies offer playability across all standard players, including CD players, boomboxes, DVD players, PCs, Macs, car stereos, video games and clock radios.”

Katz says the company wants to alert the industry that it is implementing the content-protection technology, because extensive consumer research indicates widespread customer acceptance of it.

permalink to just this entry

February 25, 2005

Something To Track [6:19 pm]

And to play at, if you have the skills! A project in progress: The Copyfight - documentary on copyright reform. Seems like I’m going to have to get my BitTorrent setup working before April 3.

The aim of The Copyfight is to serve as a link between the scholars’ debate and the general public. Notwithstanding the successes of recent political documentaries, video has traditionally been the most suitable medium for reaching a mass audience. People spend more time watching television than reading the newspapers and listening to radio combined. To reach its objective, The Copyfight will adopt a two-front approach. First, a sixty-minute documentary will be produced and released under a permissive Creative Commons license to allow file-sharing. Second, the website will serve as an index of videos related to copyright reform - be it recorded lectures or moderated debates. Along with the interviews gathered to produce the documentary, these videos will be available for the public to download and edit for their own documentary narrative. Tutorials will be designed to assist in that process.

permalink to just this entry

An Estimate on iPod Shuffle Margins [5:07 pm]

A voyage inside the iPod Shuffle

Sylvester believes it costs Apple about $59 for the materials to build the 512MB device. The most expensive component in the Shuffle is its flash memory chip, which right now costs about $31, Sylvester wrote.

Thus Apple appears to have a profit margin of about 40 percent on the 512MB player, she wrote. Sylvester estimated that Apple’s margin on the 1GB Shuffle is slightly smaller, about 35 percent. The report did not mention costs beyond the components, such as marketing, packaging, labor and other overhead. Also, while Apple sells iPods directly, it would not receive the full retail price of those sold through other stores.

permalink to just this entry

I’m Shocked, Shocked That There’s Price Gouging Going On Here!! [5:03 pm]

Says something about the mindset of the purveyors of DRM, doesn’t it? Expensive Anti-Piracyware Threatens Open Standard [pdf]

Several consumer electronics makers balk at the $1 charge for anti-piracy technology proposed by the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA), they told Reuters. The OMA is a group of handset makers, wireless telecoms operators and other technology companies.

Mobile phone makers and consumer electronics makers said $1 per device is too high a price only to protect music and video against illegal copying. They will not be able to recoup that money through revenues expected from digital entertainment.

“This kind of price is certainly unreasonable. It’s not in proportion to the economic value,” said one senior executive at a top five mobile phone maker who declined to be named.

Then again, what would be its economic value?

One more statistic:

He points out that last year alone 684 million mobile phones were sold. If handset makers had put anti-piracy protection software in those phones, the $684 million in royalties would have exceeded total digital music sales on the Web last year.

permalink to just this entry

A Plea For Moral Rights [3:28 pm]

The BBC’s Bill Thompson is always good for a different take on things. Here, he suggests that an increasingly backwatered legal doctrine ought to get more attention: The copyright ‘copyfight’ is on

However the question of reusing work does uncover a fundamental divide in this debate, one which I think may be irreconcilable.

It concerns moral rights - the rights I have as a creator to control how my work is used and exploited.

Moral rights are not about money but about integrity, and they pose great problems for those who want to liberalise copyright because they open questions of judgment, taste and even politics.

Put simply, if the law is changed to allow for remixing of work without my explicit permission, perhaps by introducing a compulsory license, then I cannot stop people I do not like or approve of using it.

This is not about getting paid - I would not want an article I had written to be used by a neo-Nazi group in their newsletter, however much I was offered.

Unfortunately most of the copyfighters take the US view of copyright as entirely about economics, and neither understand nor are interested in moral rights.

(Lessig’s response: on the challenge of moral rights)

Later: commentary at The Register - Doonesbury savages Pepperland’s copyright utopians (Lessig’s response: well, no one ever called him Jimmy Olsen) - also see Seth’s comments - Bill Thompson, Creative Commons, and “Moral Rights” in Copyright

Note that the Doonesbury comics cited are actually reprises, with new words and positions as Trudeau shifts his position. Here’s the current cycle

Hmmm - He’s put up a pay wall, so you’ll have to decide if you want to pony up the change to see how he’s changed - here’s an archive of my postings discussing the way he revisits this topic

permalink to just this entry

James Boyle: The Value of “Free” Information [3:06 pm]

Public information wants to be free [via Copyfight]

Take weather data. The United States makes complete weather data available to anyone at the cost of reproduction. If the superb government websites and data feeds aren’t enough, for the price of a box of blank DVD’s you can have the entire history of weather records across the continental US. European countries, by contrast, typically claim government copyright over weather data and often require the payment of substantial fees. Which approach is better? If I had to suggest one article on this subject it would be the magisterial study by Peter Weiss called “Borders in Cyberspace,” published by the National Academies of Science. Weiss suggests that the US approach generates far more social wealth. True, the information is initially provided for free, but a thriving private weather industry has sprung up which takes the publicly funded data as its raw material and then adds value to it. The US weather risk management industry, for example, is ten times bigger than the European one, employing more people, producing more valuable products, generating more social wealth. Another study estimates that Europe invests €9.5bn in weather data and gets approximately €68bn back in economic value - in everything from more efficient farming and construction decisions, to better holiday planning - a 7-fold multiplier. The United States, by contrast invests twice as much - €19bn - but gets back a return of €750bn, a 39-fold multiplier. Other studies suggest similar patterns in areas ranging from geo-spatial data to traffic patterns and agriculture. “Free” information flow is better at priming the pump of economic activity.

Some readers may not thrill to this way of looking at things because it smacks of private corporations getting a “free ride” on the public purse - social wealth be damned. But the benefits of open data policies go further.

The National Academies does have a WWW page on the Committee on Partnerships in Weather and Climate Services, but I can’t find the NAS publication to which Prof Boyle refers. Note that Peter Weiss seems to have been writing on this theme for some time. Some examples:

permalink to just this entry

Lessig on PA, TX, etc. [12:12 pm]

Why Your Broadband Sucks

You’ll be pleased to know that communism was defeated in Pennsylvania last year. Governor Ed Rendell signed into law a bill prohibiting the Reds in local government from offering free Wi-Fi throughout their municipalities. The action came after Philadelphia, where more than 50 percent of neighborhoods don’t have access to broadband, embarked on a $10 million wireless Internet project. City leaders had stepped in where the free market had failed. Of course, it’s a slippery slope from free Internet access to Karl Marx. So Rendell, the telecom industry’s latest toady, even while exempting the City of Brotherly Love, acted to spare Pennsylvania from this grave threat to its economic freedom.

Related: Imagine Electricity - other earlier posting pointing to more

permalink to just this entry

Pricing in Music eTailing [8:32 am]

A couple of Register articles on the state of play in the EU:

  • Europe probes ‘rip off’ Apple iTunes pricing

    The European Commission (EC) has confirmed it is looking into allegations that Apple’s iTunes Music Store discriminates against UK consumers by charging them more to download the same song than it charges other European music buyers.

  • Woolworths targets digital music rivals with price cut

    UK retail giant Woolworths today put pressure on rival - and better known - online digital music services like Napster and Apple’s iTunes by offering sales tax-free downloads, bringing the per-track price down to 67p.

    [...] There’s a catch, of course: the new price is only available for the next six weeks. Woollies is simply absorbing the 17.5 per cent VAT due on each download itself as a loss-leader to encourage sales.

permalink to just this entry

WaPo Discovers iPod DJing [8:14 am]

Downloaded and Ready to Rock[pdf] (also see earlier Music Sharing: Public Performance)

It’s 9:20 p.m. on a recent Wednesday. P.Vo, known by day as Paul Vodra, is the first of 21 DJs — ahead of Seeking Irony and Weird Curves — who will play at this city’s version of an iPod DJ party. On this night, the most popular MP3 player, the iPod, serves as the lounge’s source of music, roughly three songs at a time. No turntables. No vinyl. Bring an iPod. Be the DJ. Please sign your DJ name on the white board in the front.

[...] Sure, there’s an intimate feel to the lounge, a friendly, down-to-earth vibe. Still, there’s always someone like Paul Straka who sneers upon hearing “Pieces of Me,” not Ashlee Simpson’s, but the cut from the local go-go band Rare Essence.

“Listen to this awful, awful music,” says the 28-year-old computer programmer from Manhattan who’s in town visiting friends. Just because it’s iPod night doesn’t mean the music is going to be any good, he says.

Wotowiec decides tonight is not the night for his iPod debut. So a few hours after arriving at the lounge, fresh from evening Mass, Wotowiec makes two vows: to come back next month, and to come back with “better stuff.”

“Next time, I’m gonna come back with more edgy stuff: You know, one hard-core country song, one hard-core metal song, one really, really, really dark techno song. Maybe a movie clip. Next time, when I come back, I’ll be prepared, I’ll be myself.”

permalink to just this entry

February 2005
« Jan   Mar »

0.217 || Powered by WordPress